Why are we considering Gabbert and not...

[Prov401]

Ryan Mallett

3,869 YDS, 32 TD's, 12 INT's, 64.7 CMP%

The best passer in this draft, without question. Best touch, best zip, best accuracy, best release.

Everybody marked him down as having a single digit wonderlic. Well, that didn't happen. As a matter of fact, he satisfies the QB rule everybody eat, sleeps, and breathes by on this board.

He's big, strong, and accurate.

I'm not making a case to draft him at #3. I'm just saying, if we're considering someone who is far less accurate, has zero touch, cannot throw the deep pass, checks down, came out of f'n nowhere once Luck dropped out... If we are conisdering Blaine Gabbert at 3, why the hell are we not considering drafting someone who is clearly a better passer than him.

The 40 time is ridiculous. Marino wasn't blazing, and Brady ran a 5.3.

I don't get it.

Mallett is the best QB in this draft. Yet we're considering drafting Alex Smith 2.0, and that's probably a compliment.

[BertSquirtgum]

Re: Why are we considering Gabbert and not...

because chan gailey likes mobile quarterbacks, not quarterbacks that run like they have cement blocks as their feet.

[Mski]

Re: Why are we considering Gabbert and not...

just because he's slow running in a line, doesnt mean he's not mobile. ie: Peyton Manning

[Prov401]

Re: Why are we considering Gabbert and not...

because chan gailey likes mobile quarterbacks, not quarterbacks that run like they have cement blocks as their feet.

lol, I love the obsession with QB's who move, and are fast.

Not once has a running QB ever won the super bowl.

Hell, look recently. Brady and both Mannings aren't speedy QB's. They are good a eluding pressure, and stepping up in the pocket. Being fast and having good pocket presence are two totally different things.

[Raptor]

Re: Why are we considering Gabbert and not...

To much off the field stuff. With that much smoke there has to be a fire somewhere

[justasportsfan]

Re: Why are we considering Gabbert and not...

more red flags

[Danny Duberstein]

Re: Why are we considering Gabbert and not...

idk.....heading into the 2010 season, I really wanted Mallet. But as I watched him play, I slowly started to sour on him. Now, I don't even think I'd want him.

I'm not concerned with his speed, or athleticism. Or the off-field stuff. What bothers me is the way he collapses under pressure. He just looks like he folds up way too easily. I can't stomach another pussy quarterback.

If he goes to a team with a good OLine (maybe Minnesota), I think he could be good. But let's be honest, if we draft him, he'll be under pressure constantly, and I think he'll just fold.

[BertSquirtgum]

Re: Why are we considering Gabbert and not...

just because he's slow running in a line, doesnt mean he's not mobile. ie: Peyton Manning

are you saying peyton manning is mobile?


he sits in the pocket all day long.

[YardRat]

Re: Why are we considering Gabbert and not...

lol, I love the obsession with QB's who move, and are fast.

Not once has a running QB ever won the super bowl.

Hell, look recently. Brady and both Mannings aren't speedy QB's. They are good a eluding pressure, and stepping up in the pocket. Being fast and having good pocket presence are two totally different things.

Although I agree with you, Steve Young was a pretty good running QB.

I liked Mallett very early in the season, but became less impressed with him the more I watched. He's a slow-footed system QB with possible character issues. I might be OK with taking a chance on him in the second or third, but no way at #3.

[BidsJr]

Re: Why are we considering Gabbert and not...

just because he's slow running in a line, doesnt mean he's not mobile. ie: Peyton Manning

While your premise is true.... He still isn't mobile. Even in the pocket.

[Mski]

Re: Why are we considering Gabbert and not...

are you saying peyton manning is mobile?


he sits in the pocket all day long.

i am saying he is mobile, and he does sit in the pocket all day long, and he is able to do that because of his mobility within the pocket

[TheGhostofJimKelly]

Re: Why are we considering Gabbert and not...

Three months ago nobody mentions this kids name. One of the draft "experts" says he is the one of the best qbs in the country and all of a sudden everyone wants him and everyone loves him, here are two reasons I don't think so:

Can't get embedded:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZWc8ZnW0Lw

[Philagape]

Re: Why are we considering Gabbert and not...

Although I agree with you, Steve Young was a pretty good running QB.

Elway too

[BertSquirtgum]

Re: Why are we considering Gabbert and not...

Although I agree with you, Steve Young was a pretty good running QB.

I liked Mallett very early in the season, but became less impressed with him the more I watched. He's a slow-footed system QB with possible character issues. I might be OK with taking a chance on him in the second or third, but no way at #3.

I would rather the Bills take a chance on Jake Locker in the third than Mallett.

[Prov401]

Re: Why are we considering Gabbert and not...

Three months ago nobody mentions this kids name. One of the draft "experts" says he is the one of the best qbs in the country and all of a sudden everyone wants him and everyone loves him, here are two reasons I don't think so:

I'm telling you bro, I have no clue what the attraction is to this clown. He's nothing special at all. And you should definitely be something special to be selected at #3 in the NFL draft.

Mallett will have a better career than goldie locks... book it.